"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
| On Wed, 14 May 2008 03:54:52 +0100, "Androcles"

| wrote:
|
|
| "Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
| .. .
|
| | If this second ring is concentric with the rotating ring then it IS
| rotating
| | in the
| | opposite direction in frame of reference, and if not then it is
orbiting
| my
| | ring,
| | crossing my sky as I turn just as the sun does. Indeed, the Earth and
Sun
| | are
| | two such rings.
| | I've intelligently read carefully and find you have not made
adequate
| | definition
| | for me to understand your intent at this stage.
| |
| | Of course the second ring is concentric. it is right next to the gyro
| ring.
|
|
|
| It can't be right next to, left next to, front next to or back next to,
it
| can only be above next to or below next to. There is no "of course"
| about it, your descriptions are vague and imprecise. Just because
| you know what you mean doesn't mean anybody else does.
|
| Stop acting dumb.....I assume you're acting....

I'm smarter than you'll ever know or appreciate. Your language is too
imprecise to be acceptable as anything called "science". "Obviously"
I have to rely on past knowledge and experience of your mentality to
know the difference between what you mean and what you say, "of
course". Your pathetic cliche, "right next to", is "left" wide open
to intepretation. I conclude you don't know right from left. That's
hardly surprising since you live in Oz and are upside-down.



| The two rings are parallel and adjacent.

Ah... now that is scientific language, much better than "right next to".
So why didn't you say so?
If you want me to read carefully then you must write carefully, as I do.


| Have a look at the back wheels of the
| next semi-trailer that goes past.

What's a semi-trailer? Half a ****ing trailer? Which half am I to
look at, the half left at home or the half drawn by the semi-tractor?

| What happens if the brakes are put on one and not the other....jacked up
of
| course.

No no, jack-knife occurs when you put the brakes on the tractor.
Unless you mean lowering the trailer jacks, but then you don't need
a tractor and it doesn't "go past".
Wilson, I speak fluent English and fluent American, but Ozzie I never
learned beyond "G'day, mate" and "Fosters, orstrylian for beer."
That's awful **** too.


|
| | | At certain instant, you emit two pulses of light in opposite
| directions
| | around
| | | the ring. You also place a mark on the nonrotating ring.
| | |
| | | What happens to the mark?
| | | Answer: it appears to move away from you at v.
| |
| | Not at all, it moves away at v.sin(t), eventually returning.
| |
| | The movement is only a couple of light wavelengths at the most.
| | You can assume the movement is in a straight line and is just vt..
|
| Are you saying ring microwave gyroscopes won't work?
| I don't ASSUME anything, Wilson, especially when there is no need to.
|
| the movement is straight.
| Forget the ****ing sine.

No. I'm a mathematician, you are sheep shagger. The movement is curved.


|
| You are less intelligent so can't possibly see what's going on.
| READ CAREFULLY as I do.
|
| THE MARK MOVES AWAY AT V.SIN(T), EVENTUALLY RETURNING.
| ****ing physicists, hopeless at mathematics, clueless the lot of them.
|
| The pulse moves away at c in the rotating frame and eventually returns.

Nope, c.sin(2pi).
Oh wait, forget the ****ing eventual return.


| The mark moves only a few microns at most during that time interval.

Depends on the radius.
2pi.r may be only a couple of microns but 2pi.R is 584336233 miles.

|
| | | By the time the pulses return, the mark has moved a distance vt
away.
| |
| | The pulses never return, they travel directly away from me in opposite
| | directions and continue forever.
| |
| | We are discussing a ring gyro in which total internal reflection
occurs.
| As far
| | as this argument is concerned the rays move in straight lines.
|
|
| Ok, so far I have read carefully and:
| i) the mark is stationary and moves.
|
| The mark is stationary in the inertial frame but moves in the rotating
frame.
| Relativists are incapable of understanding that.

Inertial? What's that?
Oh wait, you've been indoctrinated by ****heads and expect to me to
understand. I can't find "inertial" anywhere in Einstein's paper and I read
carefully, what are you babbling about?

|
| ii) the mark moves in a straight line.
|
| Near enough.

22/7 is pi, near enough.


|
| iii) arcs are straight lines.
|
| A micron long arc on a 10cm circle is as good as straight.

Arcs are measured in units of angle, not cm.



|
| iv) the light reflects from total internal reflection by sqrt(2), you
once
| said.
|
| I did not.

Yes you did, you lying *******. You even made a hopeless drawing of 4
mirrors using BASIC and ranted for a year about it.

" The ballistic theory and Sagnac. In this frame, the speed of light
will be c, and the distance between the mirrors
will be sqrt(2)*r. (That's why the first order approximation is t ...
If you run
my program www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/sagnac.exe you will observe that
rays that
start out 90 apart do not reunite at the same point on the detector.
...."
-- 24 Feb 2006 by Henri Wilson

That was load of garbage, wasn't it?
|
| v) the world is flat.
|
| My neighbour's tennis court is....but he's quite round.

I expect you are too. I know I am.


|
| vi) You are upside down.
|
| Not in polar coordinates.
|
| vii) You are less intelligent so you can't possibly see what's going on.
|
| I might be a specialist in teaching physics to engineers but sometimes the
| pupils are incapable of learning.

The pupils recognise bull**** when they see it.


|
|
| | That's a very poor programming technique, you have only to make
| | a typographical error in "3.14259265" somewhere and you'll never spot
it,
| | whereas by writing "pi = 3.14159265" at the beginning it is defined
| | throughout.
| | I never write 3.141592653589790
| | as a value in excel, I use pi() instead.
| |
| |
| | Grandpa doesn't ride the carousel, Wilson, only the kids do that.
| | http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/gu...s/coriolis.mov
| |
| | In a ring gyro, the detector rides the ring.
|
| The detector is not where the rays meet "in phase" going in opposite
| directions, Wilson, or it wouldn't detect anything. First, one of the
rays
| has to meet a reflector "in which total internal reflection occurs" so
that
| it goes the same way as the other ray.
|
| The 'reflector' is a half silvered plain mirror. It doesn't involve
internal
| reflection.

****ing hopeless.

|
|
| |
| | | Of course YOU have no way of knowing that the mark represents the
| original
| | | position of the emission point or that you are rotating with a
| peripheral
| | speed
| | | of v. You have every reason to believe that both pulses move away
from
| you
| | at c
| | | and travel the same distance, 2piR in the same time. You are
therefore
| | | mystified by the fact that they are not in phase when they reunite.
| |
| | I'm not mystified at all, Wilson, but you are.
| | When two kids pace their way around the carousel matching step for
step
| | they arrive "in phase" back at the start point. Only when they step
off
| | and one rides the moving sidewalk and the other does not do they get
| | "out of phase" because one is travelling faster than the other.
| |
| | In a ring gyro stuck in an aeroplane, the kids don't ever get off.
|
| You are less intelligent so you can't possibly see what's going on.
| READ CAREFULLY as I do.
| They walk around in a circle at the tail, collide (in step) and
| walk down the aisle of the plane at different speeds, one arriving
| at the flight deck before the other. The captain sees which one
| arrived first and knows which way his plane is rotating. It doesn't
| work if he's at the tail.
|
| That's the SR/aether analysis.
| You have revealed your true beliefs.

Enough. You are so obviously a ****** there is nothing to
do but plonk you, you stupid ****.
*plonk*

On Thu, 15 May 2008 01:18:05 +0100, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .
| On Wed, 14 May 2008 03:54:52 +0100, "Androcles"

| | Of course the second ring is concentric. it is right next to the gyro
| ring.
|
|
|
| It can't be right next to, left next to, front next to or back next to,
it
| can only be above next to or below next to. There is no "of course"
| about it, your descriptions are vague and imprecise. Just because
| you know what you mean doesn't mean anybody else does.
|
| Stop acting dumb.....I assume you're acting....

I'm smarter than you'll ever know or appreciate. Your language is too
imprecise to be acceptable as anything called "science". "Obviously"
I have to rely on past knowledge and experience of your mentality to
know the difference between what you mean and what you say, "of
course". Your pathetic cliche, "right next to", is "left" wide open
to intepretation. I conclude you don't know right from left. That's
hardly surprising since you live in Oz and are upside-down.

.....Still acting dumb.....

| The two rings are parallel and adjacent.

Ah... now that is scientific language, much better than "right next to".
So why didn't you say so?
If you want me to read carefully then you must write carefully, as I do.

.....Still acting dumb.....


| Have a look at the back wheels of the
| next semi-trailer that goes past.

What's a semi-trailer? Half a ****ing trailer? Which half am I to
look at, the half left at home or the half drawn by the semi-tractor?

A semi-trailer is Aussie for a truck with a front 'prime mover' and a back half
that carries the load. I'm sure you've seen one.


| What happens if the brakes are put on one and not the other....jacked up
of
| course.

No no, jack-knife occurs when you put the brakes on the tractor.
Unless you mean lowering the trailer jacks, but then you don't need
a tractor and it doesn't "go past".
Wilson, I speak fluent English and fluent American, but Ozzie I never
learned beyond "G'day, mate" and "Fosters, orstrylian for beer."
That's awful **** too.

All beer is ****...full of preservative and other crap and lacking vitamin B.
Beer drinkers end up braindead and hypertense.....unlike us healthy consumers
of good red wine.

| | The movement is only a couple of light wavelengths at the most.
| | You can assume the movement is in a straight line and is just vt..
|
| Are you saying ring microwave gyroscopes won't work?
| I don't ASSUME anything, Wilson, especially when there is no need to.
|
| the movement is straight.
| Forget the ****ing sine.

No. I'm a mathematician, you are sheep shagger. The movement is curved.

.....Still acting dumb.....

| You are less intelligent so can't possibly see what's going on.
| READ CAREFULLY as I do.
|
| THE MARK MOVES AWAY AT V.SIN(T), EVENTUALLY RETURNING.
| ****ing physicists, hopeless at mathematics, clueless the lot of them.
|
| The pulse moves away at c in the rotating frame and eventually returns.

Nope, c.sin(2pi).
Oh wait, forget the ****ing eventual return.

.....Still acting dumb.....

| The mark moves only a few microns at most during that time interval.

Depends on the radius.
2pi.r may be only a couple of microns but 2pi.R is 584336233 miles.

The latest ring gyros are usually only a few cms in diameter.


| Ok, so far I have read carefully and:
| i) the mark is stationary and moves.
|
| The mark is stationary in the inertial frame but moves in the rotating
frame.
| Relativists are incapable of understanding that.

Inertial? What's that?

The NonRotating frame at rest with the centre of rotation of the ring.


| ii) the mark moves in a straight line.
|
| Near enough.

22/7 is pi, near enough.

sometimes

|
| iii) arcs are straight lines.
|
| A micron long arc on a 10cm circle is as good as straight.

Arcs are measured in units of angle, not cm.

For very small angles, tan(x) ~= sin(x) ~= x becasue the arc is as good as
straight.

| iv) the light reflects from total internal reflection by sqrt(2), you
once
| said.
|
| I did not.

Yes you did, you lying *******. You even made a hopeless drawing of 4
mirrors using BASIC and ranted for a year about it.

A four mirror sagnac doesn't involve internal reglection.....pity engineers are
taught any optics....

" The ballistic theory and Sagnac. In this frame, the speed of light
will be c, and the distance between the mirrors
will be sqrt(2)*r. (That's why the first order approximation is t ...
If you run
my program www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/sagnac.exe you will observe that
rays that
start out 90 apart do not reunite at the same point on the detector.
..."
-- 24 Feb 2006 by Henri Wilson

That was load of garbage, wasn't it?

How can it be garbage when it is fully supported by experimental evidence.

| v) the world is flat.
|
| My neighbour's tennis court is....but he's quite round.

I expect you are too. I know I am.

I'm not.

| vi) You are upside down.
|
| Not in polar coordinates.
|
| vii) You are less intelligent so you can't possibly see what's going on.
|
| I might be a specialist in teaching physics to engineers but sometimes the
| pupils are incapable of learning.

The pupils recognise bull**** when they see it.

.....Still acting dumb.....


| | In a ring gyro, the detector rides the ring.
|
| The detector is not where the rays meet "in phase" going in opposite
| directions, Wilson, or it wouldn't detect anything. First, one of the
rays
| has to meet a reflector "in which total internal reflection occurs" so
that
| it goes the same way as the other ray.
|
| The 'reflector' is a half silvered plain mirror. It doesn't involve
internal
| reflection.

****ing hopeless.

Obviously NOT acting....

| | In a ring gyro stuck in an aeroplane, the kids don't ever get off.
|
| You are less intelligent so you can't possibly see what's going on.
| READ CAREFULLY as I do.
| They walk around in a circle at the tail, collide (in step) and
| walk down the aisle of the plane at different speeds, one arriving
| at the flight deck before the other. The captain sees which one
| arrived first and knows which way his plane is rotating. It doesn't
| work if he's at the tail.
|
| That's the SR/aether analysis.
| You have revealed your true beliefs.

Enough. You are so obviously a ****** there is nothing to
do but plonk you, you stupid ****.
*plonk*

Gid riddance to a closet aetherist....



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

.....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....

On Apr 19, 4:57 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...7a506fee1bf10?
"Redshift - Does wavelength change?"

Silly Vesselin Petkov has discovered that the gravitational redshift
is due to the variation of the speed of light in a gravitational
field, in accordance with Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2), but
Criminal Tom Roberts fiercely confuses Silly Vesselin Petkov and does
not allow him to leave the zombie group in Einstein criminal cult and
become hypnotist.

Silly Vesselin Petkov confused forever:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/9810/9810030v14.pdf
Silly Vesselin Petkov: "It is usually assumed that both frequency and
wavelength of a photon in the gravitational redshift change whereas
its velocity remains constant. In this note we shall show that it is
the frequency of a photon that does not change whereas its velocity
and wavelength change."

Pentcho Valev